Skip to comments.White House Lied About Editing Benghazi Talking Points
Posted on 05/16/2013 4:51:15 PM PDT by raptor22
Scandal In Libya: A new email dump shows that the White House, contrary to public statements, was heavily involved in editing the Benghazi talking points to remove all references to it being a terrorist attack.
The limited, heavily redacted package of emails released by the administration Wednesday is noteworthy for what the emails don't say and reflect a concerted effort by the White House and State Department not to get at the truth but to put something together to help President Obama in an election two months out.
The email package begins some 67 hours after the Sept. 11, 2012, terrorist attack on our consulate in Benghazi. It does not discuss the infamous YouTube video that U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice would refer to in her Sept. 16 foray on five Sunday talk shows or that President Obama would refer to six times in a Sept. 26 speech before the United Nations.
The video is mentioned only briefly in the subject line of emails coming out of an important meeting where further revisions were made.
The emails do show that Deputy National Security Adviser Ben Rhodes and National Security Council spokesman Tommy Vietor were alerted that the intelligence community was drafting talking points that as late as 3:04 p.m. on Friday, Sept. 14, still included references to extremists tied to al-Qaida and an "attack."
The terms "al-Qaida" and "attack" were stripped out by 4:42 p.m., and shortly afterward Vietor thanked colleagues for revisions and said they would be vetted "here," as in the White House.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.investors.com ...
Well if 0bama or his little hand puppet jay carney opened their mouths, you knew a lie was coming out.
hadn’t heard it before
had to look it up
Oh, please, I want to see Carney at a press conference tomorrow! Pleasepleaseplease...
The White House lied about everything.
What could be more 'political' than NOT telling America there was a terrorist attack so as to ease impact to 0bama's re-election?
The Dems 'politicized Benghazi' from day one.
What is wrong with that building? :)
IBD EDITORIAL PING
Now, focus on WHY.
It wasn’t reelection.
It has to do with why 30+ CIA operatives were in Benghazi.
Gun running to Al Qaeda in Syria.
At 2 recent pressers, Carney was still saying the WH only made one (1) change: consulate to diplomatic facility.
At one, a presser asked him about the 12 revisions, and he obfuscated.
But what can one expect from the WH Team that continued to use the movie trailer excuse for 3 weeks following the Benghazi attacks?
You’re absolutely right. It’d be amazing, a minor miracle in fact, if hussein’s White House ever issued a statement that was completely true. For me, on any given topic/issue whatever hussein or his cohorts in crime state, I figure just about the opposite is true.
Thanks for posting this.
IBD EDITORIAL PING
>>>What is wrong with that building? :)>>>
It’s WHITE, that’s what’s wrong with it. But don’t worry, 0 will have it painted pink.
Of the three stories that are current (Benghazi, AP, IRS), only Benghazi can bring Obama and Hillary down. He can distance himself from the other scandals, and demand the resignation of underlings.
But in the Benghazi incident, the question remains, and must be pressed: “What were Obama and Hillary doing while the attack was going on?” Not talking points, not cover-up. But lack of decision at the crucial time. Lack of support for Americans in danger. Were they listening? Or were they sleeping? How did they spend those hours while four Americans were dying?
But Benghazi has taken a back seat to IRS and AP. The IRS scandal will make people turn against Obama, but he will remain in office, and Hillary will get away clean, as she is not involved in the IRS or AP scandals.
Impeachment File on Benghazi Coward B. Hussein Obama, aka Barry Soetoro, a legal citizen of the sovereign Nation of Indonesia.
IBD EDITORIAL PING
I agree. It’s of interest to me as well. But obama would just lie and say he was in constant touch and monitoring the situation. You won’t catch him on that question. Its too easy to dodge. We need to find orders or actions by obama that expose him.
I’m going to round up the usual low-level bullshiiters Rick.
He was monitoring the situation - and did nothing? That's as damning as saying he was sleeping. That's my point. Nothing was done to help those people. Was he monitoring and doing nothing, or was he otherwise occupied? It focuses everyone's mind on his most important failure, and on Hillary's most important failure. The famous commercial about the 3 AM phone call comes to mind when you think about the hours during which the diplomatic outpost was actually under attack.
Obama and Hillary had their chance to show what they were made of. An attack went on for hours, and they did nothing.
Yes it is awful to do nothing. But not impeachable.
I guess I’m more concerned about putting blame where it should be - on Obama and Hillary (our next President?) - than impeaching Obama. He can’t blame Benghazi on underlings, and Hillary can’t point to others. They were both in this one up to their ears.
Black with bling!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.